Interesting that the Bible is "the Word of God", unless someone quotes a translation you disagree with.
- Thread starter St. SteVen
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Bob Estey
Well-Known Member
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
I do have something against the NIV. It's not missing verses or some kind of theological bias... those are small issues that exist in EVERY Bible.
It's HOW the NIV is translated.
The KJV (and YLT and many others) are word-for-word translations. There's basically a 1-to-1 correspondence between the original language and English words used to translate. I find this feature useful, as it allows me to look things up in a concordance and study usage across the Bible to get a good sense of what is being said.
I can't do that with the NIV. Since it is a thought-for-though translation, I can't see past the English words to the Hebrew and Greek. I'm left at the mercy of the translator. I don't like that.
I mostly use blueletterbible.org nowadays. Click on a verse and it will show you... more information than you ever wanted lol.
Definitely. The KJB was THE textbook of the English language for 200+ years. Standardization of word usage and spelling in English all comes from the KJB. That doesn't have anything to do with theology, but it's a big deal anyway.
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
I have a similar view.
I don't view every bit of the Bible as inspired - just the parts that say they are. Turns out that's basically the books of prophecy plus David's Psalms and Deuteronomy in the Old Testament, and Jesus' words in the New.
Also, having taken that view, I find that the prophets often don't agree with the priests.
The Bible doesn't agree with itself quite as well as most Christians want.-Jarrod
They must have determined that it wasn't in the original autograph?
Notes in the NET version say "not found in the earliest and best witnesses".
So, apparently added later. ???
You are right though, that's an important aspect of the story.
Assumed by those in the culture in the earlier version, I suppose.
John 5:4 KJV
For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water:
whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.
Bob Estey
Well-Known Member
I believe the Word of God are those times Jesus or God are quoted.I have a similar view.
I don't view every bit of the Bible as inspired - just the parts that say they are. Turns out that's basically the books of prophecy plus David's Psalms and Deuteronomy in the Old Testament, and Jesus' words in the New.
Also, having taken that view, I find that the prophets often don't agree with the priests.
-Jarrod
Rella ~ I am a woman
Well-Known Member
Sadly no.
At one time I had 14, but they are gone...
And I am not gonna spend what they want to start collecting again.
Bob Estey
Well-Known Member
I collected some as a paper boy in the 60's. They were still in circulation, though just barely.
Wick Stick
Well-Known Member
I wonder what you think of David?
On the one hand, David does not claim to be a prophet and rarely mentions "the Word of the Lord" in his writings.
But on the other hand, the New Testament (and Luke in particular) seems to make a point of singling out his Psalms as being both prophetic and inspired:
- Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake... (Acts 1)
- Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet.... (Acts 2)
Bob Estey
Well-Known Member
I learn from people who are not perfect. We all know David wasn't perfect, but I read from Psalms every day.I wonder what you think of David?
On the one hand, David does not claim to be a prophet and rarely mentions "the Word of the Lord" in his writings.
But on the other hand, the New Testament (and Luke in particular) seems to make a point of singling out his Psalms as being both prophetic and inspired:
Thoughts?
- Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake... (Acts 1)
- Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet.... (Acts 2)
Seems... No one can take the time to comment... This is why you ALL Fail.... How can you be GOD... and then claim to have one!!!!
Jesus.... Has a God.....
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him...
Who gave him????
What to play?
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Technically, the Bible is not the "Word of God." The Word of God is not a book. It is a Person, namely Jesus Christ. The first chapter of the Gospel of John starts, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John is speaking of Jesus here. Jesus Christ is the Word of God.
The Bibles we have are translations of one of the two main methods of transmission of the Word of God to us. But only if correctly interpreted. Self-interpretation isn't the way to go, as St. Peter warns in 2 Peter 1:20-21. The reason we have so many differing and contradictory interpretations of the Bible is because people rely on personal interpretation that St. Peter warns against.
Christ didn't write a book to spread His truths. He created a Church. It would have, from a practical viewpoint, been very inadvisable to base Christ's truths on a book for everyone to read, since until the latest 100 years or so, the vast majority of earth's population would have been excluded because universal literacy wasn't of interest before that. The vast majority of people could neither read nor write.
The Bibles we have are translations of one of the two main methods of transmission of the Word of God to us. But only if correctly interpreted. Self-interpretation isn't the way to go, as St. Peter warns in 2 Peter 1:20-21. The reason we have so many differing and contradictory interpretations of the Bible is because people rely on personal interpretation that St. Peter warns against.
Christ didn't write a book to spread His truths. He created a Church. It would have, from a practical viewpoint, been very inadvisable to base Christ's truths on a book for everyone to read, since until the latest 100 years or so, the vast majority of earth's population would have been excluded because universal literacy wasn't of interest before that. The vast majority of people could neither read nor write.
You Speak as a CHILD.... What do you Know of John 1:1....
I have another train of thought for you think about. Is what you're reading into John 1 mostly church tradition? For almost 400 years, we have a read John 1 through the eyes of the Catholic Church. (reinforcing the Trinity). In the New Testament, “the Word” (Logos) happens to be of the masculine gender. Therefore, it's pronoun -"he" in our English translations - is a matter of interpretation, not translation. Did John write concerning “the word” that “he” was in the beginning with God or did he write concerning “the word” that “it” was in the beginning with God? As already stated, in the NT Greek the logos or word is masculine noun. It is okay in English to use “he” to refer back to his masculine noun if there is good contextual reason to do so. But is there good reason to make “the word” a “he” here?
It is a fact that all English translations from the Greek before the King James version of 1611 actually read this way: (notice Him and He are now “It”).
Tyndale 1534:
Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with God. 3 All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made. 4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of
men
Cranmer 1539
John 1:1 IN the begynnynge was the worde and the worde was wyth God: and God was the worde. 2 The same was in the begynnyng with God. 3 All thynges were made by it and without it, was made nothynge that was made. 4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was the lyght of
men
Bishops 1568:
Joh 1:1 In the begynnyng was the worde, & the worde was with God: and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the begynnyng with God. 3 All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght
of men,
Geneva 1587:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God. 2 This same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life, and that life was the light of
men.
And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In it was life, and the life was the light of men."
The word logos appears many, many more times in this very Gospel of John. And nowhere else do the translators capitalize it or use the masculine personal pronoun "he" to agree with it !
The rest of the New Testament is the same. Logos is variously translated as "statement" (Luke 20:20), “question" (Matt 21:24), "preaching" (1 Tim 5:17), "command" (Gal 5:14), "message" (Luke 4:32), "matter" (Acts 15:6), "reason" (Acts 10:29), so there is actually no reason to make John one say that "the Word" is the person Jesus himself, unless of course the translators are wanting to make a point to. In all cases logos is an “it.”
In the light of this background it is far better to read John's prologue to mean that in the beginning God had a plan, a dream, a grand vision for the world, a reason by which He brought all things into being. This word or plan was expressive of who he is.
"The Word" for John is an “it” not a "he." On one occasion, Jesus is given the name "the word of God" and this is in Revelations 19:13. This name has been given to him after his resurrection and ascension, but we will not find it before his birth. It is not until we come to verse 14 of John's prologue that this logos becomes personal and becomes the son of God, Jesus. "And the Word became flesh." A great plan that God had in his heart from before the creation at last is fulfilled. Be very clear that it does not say that God became flesh.
There is even strong evidence suggesting that John himself reacted to those who were already misusing his gospel to mean that Jesus was himself the Word who had personally preexist the world. When later he wrote his introduction to 1 John, he clearly made the point that what was in the beginning was not a “who” he put it this way: "What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the word of life…"
Logos - This word is translated in English as "Word". This word has an actual meaning which has been almost completely lost due to the Greek philosophical interpretation of John 1:1-3 & 14.
who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. (Rev 1:2)
"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word (logos) of God." (Rev 20:4)
Notice that they were beheaded for their testimony to Jesus AND for the logos of God.
Jesus and the word of God are not the same thing.
John 12:48 "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one (God) who judges him; the word ( logos ) I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.
Again… Jesus spoke the Logos, as He is not the Logos! So who is the Logos? The very next verse tell us!
Joh 12:49 "For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.
Jesus is not our Judge, but our savior!
Joh 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
Act 17:30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, 31 because He ( God) has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
Part 1
Paul
Last edited:
Thanks for weighing in on this topic.
A couple of things to note. Firstly I agree that "the Word of God" is not the Bible.
I had it in quotes in my title as well. So, we agree there.
I also agree that "... the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
But I don't go so far as others in claiming the word WAS Jesus.
Verse 14 tells us that the word BECAME flesh. That flesh was Jesus.
To me, the Word/Logos/logic/reason/purpose isn't a person.
It's a purposeful plan, a meaning and intention. A reasoned and positive outcome for all this.
Which is very good news.
I know my POV on this doesn't agree with the standard dogma.
Try not to hate me for it. Thanks.
Can you also weigh in on the topic title statement?
What is the source of biblical disagreements we see on the forum?
Part 2
Word of God in this verse means God's plan of salvation for us (NAB), i.e. the kingdom
of God message. So what does "logos" mean?
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an
external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea (New American Bible (footnote) & Vine’s Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
I will give you a brief paraphrase of John 1:1-3 using the definitions for "logos:"
"In the beginning was God's plan, will, or idea for our salvation. It was present in his mind, and God's plan or will possessed all the attributes of God."
The very Trinitarian Roman Catholic New American Bible has this comment on this verse:
"Lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."
Predication - to affirm as a quality or attribute (Webster's Dictionary).
So how does the Word (logos) become flesh in John 1:14? Let me use an example which most of us can relate to. We are all familiar with the expression, "was this baby planned?" Let's say it was planned. You and your wife had a plan to have a baby. You had a logos, a plan. Your plan (logos) became flesh the day that your baby was born. In the same way, God's plan of salvation for us became a reality, became flesh, when Jesus was born. This verse is probably one of the biggest culprits in the creation of the trinity. The reason being that to someone educated in Greek philosophy such as the early church fathers of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th, centuries, logos had an entirely different meaning. Tertullian who was responsible for much of the creation of the trinity was a Stoic lawyer. The Stoics defined "logos" as the "divine principle of life." Which is basically a definition of God. With this definition you are going to arrive at a completely different interpretation than what John intended. You will interpret it something like this:
"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, and the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God. Then, the divine principle of life became flesh."
With this definition you arrive at the conclusion that the divine principle of life, which is God, became flesh. Now you have God's essence in two places at once. The explanation for this obvious problem came in the form of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Then you have God's essence in flesh, so the description of Jesus becomes that he is fully God and fully man. These concepts come straight out of Greek philosophy. Greek philosophers believed that man was composed of flesh and a divine spark.
John 12:48 "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word ( logos ) I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.
Again… Jesus spoke the Logos, He is not the Logos!
1Jn 1:1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life-- 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us--
What does scripture teach you about... What was from the beginning?
Pay attention as we need to get a little deeper comparing both John 1:1 with 1 John 1:1
John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word." 1 John 1:1 – "What was from the beginning, what we have heard."
Notice that in John what is from the beginning is the word, and in 1 John what is from the beginning is something that they heard (a message) .
Look closely...
1 John 2:7 - "Beloved, I am writing no new commandment to you but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard."
In 1 John 1:1 what was from the beginning is something that they heard, here in 1 John 2:7 the old commandment is what they have had from the beginning, (sound familiar?) and the old commandment is the "WORD" that they what? Heard! The same as in 1 John 1:1.
So, What commandment is John speaking about?
John is speaking about what Jesus called the greatest commandment, ( Mark 12:29-30 ) the commandment of love which God gave the Hebrews from the beginning. The message of love that the proclamation of the Kingdom of God brings with it.
How do we know for sure that this is the message and/or the commandment that they heard from the beginning? Because John tells you so in 1 John 3:11 and 1 John 3:23:
"For this is the message you have HEARD from the BEGINNING: we should love one another."
"And his commandment is this: we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another."
Loving one another is how the world will know that we are followers of God’s Christ.
John 13:30 – "This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."
According to Paul (Romans 13:9), the law of love is the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law and it is the Law in the coming Kingdom of God which the Messiah has come to proclaim. These are Jesus’ own words.
John is talking about the message or Logos (known by you as “word”!) By making John 1 a Trinity support verse, you lose so much truth!
Paul
Word of God in this verse means God's plan of salvation for us (NAB), i.e. the kingdom
of God message. So what does "logos" mean?
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an
external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea (New American Bible (footnote) & Vine’s Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
I will give you a brief paraphrase of John 1:1-3 using the definitions for "logos:"
"In the beginning was God's plan, will, or idea for our salvation. It was present in his mind, and God's plan or will possessed all the attributes of God."
The very Trinitarian Roman Catholic New American Bible has this comment on this verse:
"Lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."
Predication - to affirm as a quality or attribute (Webster's Dictionary).
So how does the Word (logos) become flesh in John 1:14? Let me use an example which most of us can relate to. We are all familiar with the expression, "was this baby planned?" Let's say it was planned. You and your wife had a plan to have a baby. You had a logos, a plan. Your plan (logos) became flesh the day that your baby was born. In the same way, God's plan of salvation for us became a reality, became flesh, when Jesus was born. This verse is probably one of the biggest culprits in the creation of the trinity. The reason being that to someone educated in Greek philosophy such as the early church fathers of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th, centuries, logos had an entirely different meaning. Tertullian who was responsible for much of the creation of the trinity was a Stoic lawyer. The Stoics defined "logos" as the "divine principle of life." Which is basically a definition of God. With this definition you are going to arrive at a completely different interpretation than what John intended. You will interpret it something like this:
"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, and the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God. Then, the divine principle of life became flesh."
With this definition you arrive at the conclusion that the divine principle of life, which is God, became flesh. Now you have God's essence in two places at once. The explanation for this obvious problem came in the form of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Then you have God's essence in flesh, so the description of Jesus becomes that he is fully God and fully man. These concepts come straight out of Greek philosophy. Greek philosophers believed that man was composed of flesh and a divine spark.
John 12:48 "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word ( logos ) I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.
Again… Jesus spoke the Logos, He is not the Logos!
1Jn 1:1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life-- 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us--
What does scripture teach you about... What was from the beginning?
Pay attention as we need to get a little deeper comparing both John 1:1 with 1 John 1:1
John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word." 1 John 1:1 – "What was from the beginning, what we have heard."
Notice that in John what is from the beginning is the word, and in 1 John what is from the beginning is something that they heard (a message) .
Look closely...
1 John 2:7 - "Beloved, I am writing no new commandment to you but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard."
In 1 John 1:1 what was from the beginning is something that they heard, here in 1 John 2:7 the old commandment is what they have had from the beginning, (sound familiar?) and the old commandment is the "WORD" that they what? Heard! The same as in 1 John 1:1.
So, What commandment is John speaking about?
John is speaking about what Jesus called the greatest commandment, ( Mark 12:29-30 ) the commandment of love which God gave the Hebrews from the beginning. The message of love that the proclamation of the Kingdom of God brings with it.
How do we know for sure that this is the message and/or the commandment that they heard from the beginning? Because John tells you so in 1 John 3:11 and 1 John 3:23:
"For this is the message you have HEARD from the BEGINNING: we should love one another."
"And his commandment is this: we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another."
Loving one another is how the world will know that we are followers of God’s Christ.
John 13:30 – "This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."
According to Paul (Romans 13:9), the law of love is the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law and it is the Law in the coming Kingdom of God which the Messiah has come to proclaim. These are Jesus’ own words.
John is talking about the message or Logos (known by you as “word”!) By making John 1 a Trinity support verse, you lose so much truth!
Paul
Consider the following verse in accord with what you wrote here:
| Re 19:13 | And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. |
Thanks. Good point.
How do you define Logos? What does it mean?
Why was the Logos BEFORE creation?
And most importantly...
What was the Logos before the Logos BECAME flesh and dwelt among us?
If Jesus Christ was in the beginning before creation, what was his role as Son?
Seems that the Word/Logos only make sense in the context of a fallen creation that needs a Savior. ???
I understand that my view is unorthodox. But I don't care. - LOL
Lots of questions to which I have no positive answers. I take it all one day at the time and one step at the time trying always to be led by God and/or to follow God.
No worries. If my crazy questions are thought-provoking, that is enough.
Contrary to typical Christian culture, I think the questions are more important than the answers.
As unsettling as that might be.
Seems you failed to read my post....
What we do know is... Jesus is not the Logos.....
"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word (logos) of God." (Rev 20:4)
And
AND, conj.
And is a conjunction, connective or conjoining word. It signifies that a word or part of a sentence is to be added to what precedes. Thus, give me an apple and an orange; that is, give me an apple, add or give in addition to that, an orange. John and Peter and James rode to New York, that is, John rode to New York; add or further, Peter rode to New York; add James rode to New York.
Try to actually read the long post here on this site... They actually may contain information that may help you not post questions already answered...
Now read post 133 and 135...
Your welcome!!!
Paul
Similar threads
